Trump renews push for US return to Bagram

New Delhi, Sep 21: US President Donald Trump has once again raised the prospect of American forces regaining access to Bagram Air Base, the military complex that served as the backbone of U.S. operations in Afghanistan for two decades. Trump’s recent remarks, said during an interaction with reporters, have reopened debate over whether Washington is in quiet talks with the Taliban-ruled government in Kabul, a claim that Afghan officials and analysts alike treat with scepticism.

“We’re talking to Afghanistan. It should have never been given up. It was the most embarrassing day in the history of our country,” Trump said, according to Tolo News. “I was the one that got it down to 5,000 soldiers, but we were going to keep Bagram, the air base.” Trump’s insistence that abandoning Bagram was a strategic blunder has become a recurring theme in his rhetoric since the U.S. withdrawal in 2021. He frames the base not only as a lost asset for counterterrorism but also as a potential tool in America’s rivalry with China.

The Wall Street Journal, quoted by Afghanistan’s Tolo news, citing unnamed sources, reported that ongoing discussions between Washington and Kabul led by Adam Boehler, Trump’s special envoy for hostage affairs, cover a range of issues: prisoner exchanges, economic cooperation, and a possible security component that may include limited U.S. use of Bagram.

Zalmay Khalilzad, the former U.S. special envoy for Afghan peace, suggested that resolving the prisoner and hostage dispute between the two countries could unlock broader agreements.  Khalilzad noted as reported by Tolo News. “In time, I would not rule out enhanced security cooperation, including the use of facilities such as Bagram.”

Yet officials close to the Taliban-ruled government publicly reject any suggestion of allowing foreign troops back. Zakir Jalali, deputy political director at the Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told Tolo News that Afghans have consistently resisted such arrangements. “A military presence has historically never been accepted by Afghans, and this possibility was entirely rejected during the Doha talks and agreement,” he said. Jalali added that Kabul and Washington could still pursue “political and economic relations based on mutual respect and shared interests, without the United States having any military presence in any part of Afghanistan.”

Abdul Salam Zaeef, a former Taliban diplomat, dismissed Trump’s statements outright. “No government in Afghanistan can make deals with foreign powers on this issue,” Zaeef told Tolo News, adding that Washington’s perception of Afghanistan remains “incorrect.” He warned that America’s push for a renewed presence in Bagram could be linked to preparations for “a possible World War III.” Political analyst in Kabul echo this sentiment, saying the notion was unrealistic given America’s strained alliances and domestic economic challenges. “It is impossible to implement this under current circumstances,” he argued.

Bagram Air Base carries layers of symbolism and controversy. Originally built with Soviet assistance in the 1950s, it became a hub for Moscow’s war effort during the 1980s. Revitalised after the U.S. invasion in 2001, it was transformed into a sprawling “military city,” complete with runways, barracks, shops, and even gyms. But it also housed one of Afghanistan’s most notorious prisons. Dubbed the “Guantánamo of Afghanistan,” the detention facility at Bagram was the site of widespread allegations of torture against Afghans accused of links to al-Qaeda or the Taliban.

The U.S. withdrawal in July 2021, executed overnight without informing Afghan allies, stunned the Afghan National Army and residents who woke up to find the base abandoned. For Trump, who has mentioned Bagram dozens of times since leaving office, the pullout remains the ultimate symbol of American failure.

Trump’s push to reassert U.S. presence at Bagram may resonate with domestic audiences who view Afghanistan through the lens of lost wars and rising Chinese influence. But on the ground, Kabul’s Taliban-led government has little incentive to invite back the very forces it fought for two decades. The Taliban-ruled government continues to reject foreign military bases, even as it signals willingness to explore trade and political engagement with Washington. Analysts believe that while prisoner swaps or economic talks may move forward, the re-entry of American troops is highly unlikely. Any U.S. attempt to return militarily to Afghanistan would require a reversal of political red lines that Kabul has so far shown no willingness to cross.